The Hunger Games: Catching Fire (Post-release)
- Thread starter JoMamma_Smurf
- Start date
madmikeee
Sr Member
They pretty much can't matrix it, the books are already out there and other than maybe some slight deviations to make it fresh for those people who read the books already and , obviously, to condense the story for movie format. The matrix was a great idea out of the brains of the Wachowski's but they couldn't execute the final two properly. They took it too far trying to incorporate a HORRID video game and other items to carry out a storyline that should have been in the movies. Basically they chased the money instead of providing the quality.
tubachris85x
Master Member
So I can't be the only one who thought that the "tributes barracks/living space" looked like the Atlanta Marriott that DragonCon is partially held at?
.:MirrorminD:.
Sr Member
Actually it was the Marriott, they filmed there last year, also in NJ, and Hawaii
Just saw it tonight and really enjoyed it more than the first film.
infymys
Sr Member
Saw this a couple of days ago. First, I have not read any of the books and with that, I wasn't impressed by the first one and definitely was not impressed by the second one. The pacing, at least for me, was way too slow. I also felt absolutely no attachment whatsoever to Katniss, Peeta or any other character. I lost track of who was killed. In fact, I didn't even remember who half of them were.
The thing for me is that I am a HUGE fan of Battle Royale. And I just can't help but feel that the Hunger Games is just a watered down version of that movie with elements added in for the Twilight crowd. Heck, I thought Battle Royale 2 was bad but still a better film than Hunger Games or Catching Fire.
The thing for me is that I am a HUGE fan of Battle Royale. And I just can't help but feel that the Hunger Games is just a watered down version of that movie with elements added in for the Twilight crowd. Heck, I thought Battle Royale 2 was bad but still a better film than Hunger Games or Catching Fire.
d_jedi1
Sr Member
Agreed, 100%
I also did not read the books yet. Though I think I am going to. But I thought the not really knowing anything about who was killed was sort of done on purpose. Sort of like it showed that we're pretty immune to the thought of kids fighting to the death unless they're kids we know. (Later changed from kids to people as adult winners were eligible for the Quarter Quell.)
Sandman0077
Sr Member
The author actually got a lot of flack because she lied about using Battle Royale as her source material.
They didn't really show who all was dying because it had no real effect with the storyline. Even in the books they only really know them by their district numbers. Omitting a lot of the detail was probably for time constraints because the Victory Tour took up 3/4 of the second book, with the arena only being a few chapters IIRC. That would play out to be a very boring movie though. Although I wish they hadn't left out the parts of Katniss and Peeta researching the other victors (including Haymitch), and all of the subtle hints that were given to her about the arena itself by those parties involved prior to the games. It all builds up in the book, where as in the movie it kinda just happens.
JD
Master Member
I can't find anything that shows Battle Royale is her "source material." Found a lot of stuff about similarities of the two, found a lot of stuff comparing the two, found a lot of accusations and and lot of defending Collins - but, ultimately nothing showing that Collins used Battle Royale as her "source material."
I found bits from Collins saying she hadn't heard of Battle Royale. Bits claiming Theseus and reality TV was her main inspiration.
I'm sure Collins is so upset about the "flak" she's getting that she's drying her crying eyes with the millions she's making from The Hunger Games. In the end, if the similarities were strong enough something would've happened more than just catching "flak."
Sandman0077
Sr Member
You obviously didn't do enough digging. She claims that she came up with the concept for THG in a dream (which is somewhat believable I suppose), but says that she had never heard of Battle Royale until her publisher read her rough draft and pointed out the similarities. Now she says that she used the Iraq War as the inspiration for the books. HUH? Not sure what Iraq has to do with kids killing eachother on TV, but ok lady.
Of course she could never admit it, she's making millions off of it now. Even Stephen King said she stole her ideas from his book The Running Man, which features people killing each other on reality tv. She's basically taken ideas from other popular sources and claim that she's invented the concept, and she's been called out on it at every turn.
Regardless, I love the Hunger Games books. Could care less about where she got the source material from, but as a true fan, I can't help but see the similarities as well. I don't see how you missed ABC News talking about it, but here you go:
?The Hunger Games,? a Japanese Original? - ABC News
Also a good read:
How Has The Author Of The Hunger Games Not Heard Of Battle Royale? | Thought Catalog
JD
Master Member
Oh, I did plenty of digging... and there are plenty of accusations, comparisons (both that she did steal and did not) and in the end no real proof. I have no problem with accusations, your original statement led me to believe there was real proof or acknowledgement (and not just an assumption that is apparently unprovable).
Sandman0077
Sr Member
There was an interview with the author where she slipped up and said that she actually HAD heard of Battle Royale. Couldnt tell you where to find it now though, but that was what I was referring to. I'm sure her PR team has since told her to keep her mouth shut about it, but she's made so much money I doubt it would phase her now.
JD
Master Member
When I was a kid I believed in Santa Claus.
Sandman0077
Sr Member
Seems like all my friends are busy these days, understandable though with the mid terms coming, so didn't see it yet, and will have to go alone probably.
Anyway, I had never heard of Battle Royal before HG, now I do see the similarities, but I've always pictured HG to be closer to the story of Spartacus than simply the story of kids fight each other in an arena, that's not the main point of the trilogy to me, it's the rebellion and later
Anyway, I had never heard of Battle Royal before HG, now I do see the similarities, but I've always pictured HG to be closer to the story of Spartacus than simply the story of kids fight each other in an arena, that's not the main point of the trilogy to me, it's the rebellion and later
the war
Laspector
Master Member
Just saw the second one. Sorry, but this series just doesn't do much for me. To me, it just seems the author watched Survivor and said "Hey, what if this was real?" The first half of this movie was so boring. I'm not one of those people who has to have action every second but this just dragged on and on before they got to the arena. I just don't feel anything for any of these characters.
The costume design of the rich (?) people just seems like left over Clockwork Orange stuff and I don't get the big deal with Jennifer Lawrence. Don't get me wrong, she is highly attractive, but she is just not my type for some reason. As for Josh Hutcherson, all I can think of when I see him is "Get me a juice box, beeyotch!"
And speaking of our favorite thread "What are you tired of seeing in movies?"--Where in the heck does she get all these arrows? Are they self-replicating? Because they certainly seem to be. Literally, there are "real-time" shots in this movie where her quiver is 100% empty, the very next shot there are three arrows (I counted), then the very next shot it is completely full. I mean come on!! I'm all for suspension of belief, but these shots are all in the same scene! All this happens while they doing this one long run. It's not like there are cuts where you could say "Okay, here she stopped and retrieved her arrows". Which she couldn't have done anyway because they are constantly fleeing something and her arrows are either running around stuck in wounded monkeys, lost in the water, shot into flying birds, or shot half a mile high straight up into the dome!!
So just take Survivor, The Running Man, throw in some Clockwork Orange wardrobe, add some Twilight teenage angst, and just a dash of The Truman Show, and you've got this series.
The costume design of the rich (?) people just seems like left over Clockwork Orange stuff and I don't get the big deal with Jennifer Lawrence. Don't get me wrong, she is highly attractive, but she is just not my type for some reason. As for Josh Hutcherson, all I can think of when I see him is "Get me a juice box, beeyotch!"
And speaking of our favorite thread "What are you tired of seeing in movies?"--Where in the heck does she get all these arrows? Are they self-replicating? Because they certainly seem to be. Literally, there are "real-time" shots in this movie where her quiver is 100% empty, the very next shot there are three arrows (I counted), then the very next shot it is completely full. I mean come on!! I'm all for suspension of belief, but these shots are all in the same scene! All this happens while they doing this one long run. It's not like there are cuts where you could say "Okay, here she stopped and retrieved her arrows". Which she couldn't have done anyway because they are constantly fleeing something and her arrows are either running around stuck in wounded monkeys, lost in the water, shot into flying birds, or shot half a mile high straight up into the dome!!
So just take Survivor, The Running Man, throw in some Clockwork Orange wardrobe, add some Twilight teenage angst, and just a dash of The Truman Show, and you've got this series.
Last edited:
Bigdaddy
Master Member
My daughter (11) loves the books and movies, I haven't read them but have seen the films. I thought they were pretty good, not great but not terrible. I see them as geared towards a younger crowd, and compared to the other crap out there (Twilight comes to mind :rolleyes) it's good to see something that actually sparks some interesting conversation after watching. 
Speaking as somebody who had to sit through things like Spy Kids and Shark Boy & Lava Girl for the last 6 years, this is a breath of fresh air as a "kids" movie! ("magic" quiver and all :lol) I thought Donald Sutherland stole the show in this film, the man can act! thumbsup
P.S. I never heard of Battle Royale until I saw this thread. You can dissect any story's elements and say it's not an "original" idea, I don't know about the controversy with the author ( no do I care :lol) I'm just glad a movie my daughter asked to see started a discussion on "legitimate" authority and control, instead of "cool effects!" (but it had those too! )
Speaking as somebody who had to sit through things like Spy Kids and Shark Boy & Lava Girl for the last 6 years, this is a breath of fresh air as a "kids" movie! ("magic" quiver and all :lol) I thought Donald Sutherland stole the show in this film, the man can act! thumbsupP.S. I never heard of Battle Royale until I saw this thread. You can dissect any story's elements and say it's not an "original" idea, I don't know about the controversy with the author ( no do I care :lol) I'm just glad a movie my daughter asked to see started a discussion on "legitimate" authority and control, instead of "cool effects!" (but it had those too!
)Similar threads
